"I AM NOT SURPRISED" - how we make whistle blowers disappear - 「我不意外」—吹哨者被消失的隱因—

     I was offered a job interview a while back. I was very well prepared. I was able to name everyone with his/her first name and last name in the building. (Those who witnessed me memorizing over 50 strangers' names in a performance in RVA would know my wacky memory. I missed just one name because "Debby" came in in the middle of the performance) I knew the past and current positions of everyone working in the organization. I was very aware of all the financial reports available associated to the organization.

     However, during my researches, I discovered a trail of questionable practices conducted by one specific person. It all started from a bio. I had a question about a statement from that bio, and it lead me to ask more questions and more researches. I was shocked by my findings because they suggested contradictive scenarios to the stories this organization openly stated.

     I had a really good and long interview, and I thought my interviewer might have felt like offering me the job before I started my questions. My interviewer just told me that "the gut feelings" granted no doubts about this person's work ethic or integrity, and my interviewer refused to see any evidence I'd prepared. Having loved so many people associated with the organization, I couldn't stand the thought of one short sighted person driving the reputation of the entire team into the ground just for some personal gains which may turn to dust at the end according to my further research. Knowing that I would very unlikely be offered the job because of the uneasy feelings I left with my interviewer, I then, felt obligated to share the information with someone else, a friend in my definition, also with decision making power.

     However, the story I am telling today is not about a person, a company or a job interview. It's about what I've received after sharing my knowledge with a few trusted friends. Surprisingly, "I AM NOT SURPRISED" was the most common first response after learning my findings. It turned out that the questionable figure had lots of questionable actions distributed among lots of people. Until I shared my information, most of my friends just tolerated this person's behavior or left. Every time I heard "I am not surprised", I feel a little bit encouragement as "I am not crazy" and growing frustration because more people have been wronged for a long time.

     Why is it so hard to expose anyone's wrong doings? Why wouldn't we even tell our close friends when something uneasy or unjust happened to us? It's because exposing someone takes serious amount of energy, resources, courage,..., and sometimes even the cost of lives. These are the reasons or excuses we commonly use to justify when we tolerate wrong doings:

1. That was nothing
     We tell ourselves that what happened to us was too small to address. Or sometimes we tell ourselves that this must be a one time event which doesn't need more attention. Guess what, the big bullies started from small bullies. They've taken things for granted and learned that most people would let them get away so they've kept bullying. Eventually, we ended up with mega bullies.

2. This person is a nobody
     We tend to just let it go when the wrong doings are done by whom we define small physically or influentially. Take my daughter for example. I let her baby-punch or ninja-kick me until one day this started to hurt. At first, she felt angry because I stopped her from doing something she'd done for months. Luckily, our 21 mo soon came to reason and stopped. (For those over 21 mo who can't be reasoned, shame on you!) So are the grown ups. I now believe this person probably started with small wrong doings from way back.

3. Sympathize with the person or this person's friends/family
     "This will ruin his/her life" or "This will ruin his/her family" are also very common. The truth is that if this person cared about lives of anyone, it should have stopped him/her from wrong doings. So, if this person didn't care about his/her own family/friends, why should anyone else be responsible?

4. Fear of consequences - people who can't be reasoned after evidence or facts being provided -
     The person we intend to expose is a public figure or someone seemed to be influential. A lot of time, the fear is not necessary to the person directly and is to other people who have helped make this person influential. Others who have endorsed this person may take whistle-blowing too emotionally as some personal attack. Especially, when we have evidence presented with our cases, many people would feel extra offended immediately, because they might feel these actions as accusations to their lack of insight. Instead, these people should know that the reason they were presented with the evidence this time was because someone still had hope in them to do the right thing.

     The truth is that no one is perfect. Has anyone never been deceived ever? It takes a lot of courage for people to come forward, and it also takes lots of courage (if not more) for those people to acknowledge the mistakes they might have helped make. And sometimes, the mistakes might feel so big or so spread out that no one wants to make the wake up call. Once things hit the press, depending on the press which might have also helped endorse this person or not, it could backfire on the whistle blower or even the whistle blower's family and friends. But then again, those who have got away with their wrong doings may very likely to risk again. We end up having a much bigger snowball that we still have to deal with later.

5. Shame of being a victim
     Many people blame the victims for being the victims. Knowing this as a possibility, victims have more struggles to go through before going public. A friend of mine was sexually harassed by her colleague, when she tried to report to the school, the school convinced her not to ruin this guy's career by dropping her case. At the end, the school accused her for ruining this guy's reputation, because her dropping the case meant that she made the whole thing up. My friend ended up leaving the school. I encouraged her to expose this perpetrator and the school and told her that I would help since she was foreign, but she got married and moved to a different country. At least, she is happy now.

     I like to think that most of us are responsible beings who can be reasoned with facts, logic, and evidence. And I like to think that when we are presented with reason, we choose the right thing to do. In the past, I once told potential employers that they had to make amend to a very likely mistreated person before I could accept the job. All I did was kindly asking if they had worked with such person, and if they had records compensating this person for the service this person provided. They started the investigation, found out that person did work there without any records of payments, and they apologized and paid this person. With a simple gesture like this, the public complaint from that person stopped, and I had respect and hope for the collaboration with the people in this organization.

     As most of organizations which have many employees, occasional individual slips happen. Since making mistakes is inevitable, when I look at any organization, it’s as vague as a brand name, because people who work in the majority of organizations change all the time. And, the people who currently work in the organization define what the organization stands for. I’m not looking for any organization with an impeccable history. I’m looking for an organization with people who would take responsibility fixing problems even when the problems were caused by sometimes, others. That is a really good sign, and that is the hope for a better future.

     Not as many people could recognize the name, Harry Markopolos. He persevered for over a decade when no governmental agencies ever wanted to accept his logical and mathematical evidence about an international financial scheme. If anyone he had approached would just follow one step he suggested, the multi-national investment scheme that shook up the world would have been stopped earlier. Markopolos never stopped trying. He brought more and more evidence to visit one agency after another. Eventually, the recognition came, not because of someone finally understanding his findings, but because of the public urge to blame somebody for falling for the scheme. Markopolos' name was mentioned in the public hearings several times. Many were asked if they were approached by Markopolos with his findings, and so many failed to verify just one step. Because they were involved, they were told or threatened not to get involved, they were too busy to verify, or they were too lazy to do anything?

     When a whistle blower came forward with information that happened in the past, sometimes distant past, many people would choose to question the whistle blower first instead of figuring out whether the claim was true or not. The truth is that people like Markopolos are very rare. (He wrote a book titled, "No One Would Listen - A True Financial Thriller") For most cases, we are the ones ended up with uneasy feelings, we are the ones stopping ourselves from going further, and we are very likely the ones that would say, "I am not surprised" when someone else finally shares their stories with us. (Didn't #MeToo prove this point?)


     As for today (Sep 27 2018), Dr. Ford came forward to tell her story of being sexually assaulted by the latest Supreme Court nominee. Since her, there were more voices surfacing up accusing the same person for sexual misconducts. Instead of asking them why they came forward at this moment, we should investigate immediately for the nominee's reputation and for the future of justice in this country. NO ONE WANTS A SEXUAL PREDATOR SITTING ON THE BENCH FOR LIFE! And personally, I don't even want any "suspected" sexual predator sitting on the bench ever. Is it too much to ask for a nominee without any accusation of sexual abuses? At the same time, if anyone ever thinks about destroying someone by making false claims, think again! Because, truth after tests remains true, but lies break sooner or later.

     From this moment on, I urge everyone to at least tell one trusted friend (make your best judgement) when we notice any injustice or wrong doing. If you don't have any trusted friend, at least, try to preserve as much evidence as possible, because you or someone else may appreciate your effort one day. We can't let any small bullies go easily. After leveling up, these small bullies may turn into MEGA-BULLIES that we can't get rid of anymore.

     I recently heard a joke about a deceased having "I had the right of way" on the tomb stone after being struck by another driver who didn't give the deceased the right of way as the deceased should have had by law. (The point was "You only have the right of way when you are given the right of way even though you may very likely be entitled with the right of way by law" for the defensive driving idea) Regardless of what the joke was about, I started to wonder what I like my life to mean. What would you like the world to know you for?

     "I am not surprised" ?

*英文的吹哨者(whistle blower)通常指發現刻意被隱瞞的惡行並將之公諸於世的人

     前陣子得到個工作面試，自認準備周詳。把該機構所有相關人事物，包括財務報表全部看過。面試當天，我能連名帶姓叫出所有人名字，記得所有人之前的工作與現在職位。（在維琴尼亞里奇蒙看過我某場表演的人能幫我的記憶力背書：除了某個中場後才進場的觀眾「黛比」來不及燒進我的記憶體，我成功一一叫出其他，共超過五十個陌生人的名字）

     在資料閱讀準備面試的同時，我發現某個特定人物造成一連串很可疑的事件。我的好奇心始於某人自傳中的一句話，因為那句話，我查了更多資料，產生更多問題。當我連結所有事件中之後，受到很大的刺激，因為這些任何人都能輕鬆在網路上找到的資料放在一起，就會知道該機構的實際作為與台面上號稱的差距很大，有些甚至是背道而馳。

     我的面試進展順利，自覺面試我的人在面試過程中有真的考慮僱請我。至少，到我提問前。當我針對某人的提出疑問時，面試我的人堅持他百分之百相信該人的職業道德與操守，拒看任何我準備好的證據。由於我對該機構中一些舊友的感情，我無法接受讓這一個短視近利的人為了私利而不顧所有同行者名譽的惡行。（由於更詳盡的資料檢索，我稱之為短視近利，因為該人的謀利很可能會泡沫化）明知自己已讓面試我的人不舒服，自己不太可能會得到該工作，我覺得還是得盡告知責任。於是，我把所有資料交給另一位我自覺是朋友也同時具有該機構決定權的人。

     不過，今天的重點不在這個人、這機構，或這面試。我想點出的是跟幾個信得過朋友分享自己發現後，他們最常反應的第一句話是「我不意外」。我接著得知原來這個行事可疑的對象，更早前就有讓許多人倒彈的行為。只不過到我分享自己所知以前，這些朋友都自認倒霉選擇放棄或離開。每聽到「不意外」對我是精神上的鼓勵（證明我不是妄想），也有點心寒，因為我所知的一切還可能只是冰山一角。

     為什麼公諸惡行這麼困難呢？為什麼不公義的事情發生在我們身上時，我們連最親近的朋友甚至家人都不願意分享？簡單講，舉發行為需要極大勇氣、精神、資源，⋯，有時甚至生命。以下是我歸納出，置之不理最常見的理由或藉口：

一、這是小事
     我們常告訴自己發生在我們身上的不值得一提，或告訴自己這只是很稀有的偶發狀況，所以不需要特別注意。結果，小霸凌習慣霸凌，久了就變成大霸凌，甚至超級霸凌。

二、這人是小角色
     我們也常抱持「不跟這種小人物計較」的態度，小人物的定義可能來自體型或影響力。拿我女兒當例子，我毫無怨言讓她當標靶練習手刀和忍者踢，直到某天她體型大到我開始會覺得疼痛於是得制止她。她的第一反應是生氣，因為她無法理解為什麼我突然阻止她做她從出生以來就沒被制止過的舉動。幸好，二十一個月大的她很快理解我的原因就停止之前習慣。（說到這，比二十一個月大還不可理喻的人，真該感動慚愧）對於大孩子或大人也一樣，我因此認為這個行為可以的人大概從小時候就開始累積訓練。

三、同情施壓者或其家人朋友
     「這會毀了他人生」或「這會毀了他家人與朋友」也很常見。事實上，若這個人在行為前有考慮自己家人與朋友，通常不會選擇冒險。若他自己都不在乎自己家人朋友，如何能期待別人為他自己的家人與朋友考慮？

四、對於連鎖反應的恐懼—總是有無法被證據與事實說服的無理人—
     當我們發現行為可疑的對象是公眾人物或有影響力的人時，被報復的恐懼不僅來自該對象，更來自幫助過或支持過那個人得到影響力的周邊人物。這些人可能會把舉發者的行為，解讀為對自己的人身攻擊。尤其在我們能提出證據時，這些人常因此更覺得我們在批評他們不夠仔細。其實，這些人該感到欣慰，因為這個階段表示我們對這些人還抱持希望，表示事情還在能有效災難控制的階段。

     沒有人是完美的。有人真的一輩子沒被誤導過？舉發者需要強大勇氣，接受現實而改變有時需要更大勇氣。有時候，錯誤的規模可能大到沒有人願意喊醒其他人。而當事件進入媒體層之後，還要看這媒體之前是否幫過這個行為可疑者背書，舉發者或甚至自己家人朋友可能遭到回擊。回歸之前所提，這些選擇旁門走道成功過的人，很有可能會繼續滾更巨規模的旁門左道雪球。無法早制止，我們有可能還是得面對且更可能被埋沒。

五、受害者的自卑
     太多人怪受害者受害，而受害者比旁觀者需要更大的勇氣完成舉發行為。我某朋友在學校受到同事性騷擾，她像學校通報後，學校勸她放棄以免毀了這位同事下半輩子的教學生涯。她一念之仁撤回舉報，最後學校反以此指責她誣告毀謗同事名聲（理由是「你一定是心虛所以撤回告訴」）。我得知後鼓勵她往外通報也同意幫助人生地不熟的她連結資源，但她後來碰到白馬王子嫁去別的國家過幸福快樂的生活，於是這件事就此告一段落。

     我選擇相信人具有被證據與邏輯說服的能力，因此能在證據與邏輯呈現之後做正確的決定。過去，我曾在承接工作前告訴告訴雇主他們可能得先為某人平反。 我請他們確認是否有請過這個人，再找出這個人收到報酬的證據。他們得調查結果是的確有請過這個人人，但找不到付錢的證據，於是他們很快道歉並付清。如此簡單行為，這個人停止在公眾場合婊該機構，我也對與該機構裡人共事有期待與希望。

     大多數機構有數位僱員，偶發人為錯誤是正常現象。既然錯誤無法被完全避免，我看待任何機關行號的名稱就如同品牌一樣虛無，因為實際上操作者可能一直變換。品牌名稱本身沒有意義，機關行號內的人員才是機關行號實際行為代表。也就是說，我不期待任何機關行號擁有完美歷史，我想看到的是目前機關行號內的人員有自我修正，甚至為別人造成的錯誤修正的責任感。這樣的態度，象徵未來的希望。

     少數人認得出Harry Markopolos的名字。Markopolos偶然發現跨國金融弊案，希望以邏輯與數學實證點醒政府機關，一個不聽，抱著更多證據再來或換對象通報，堅持了逾十年。若任何他接觸過政府單位人士只要實行他建議確認的一小步，後來重挫全世界的假投資崩盤，很可能提早以小規模損失收場。Markopolos的發現終於被重視，但被重視的原因不是為了阻止惡行，而是在崩盤後，損失的投資人需要尋元兇幫兇咎責。Markopolos的名字在公聽會的問題中出現數次，很多人被問「Markopolos先生曾向你通報過他的發現嗎」？很多人都聽過Markopolos的發現，但這些人全都選擇沈默。也許他們自己也陷入太深，也許他們被脅迫，也許他們太忙無法分心，也許他們太懶，也許他們只是選擇不相信。

     當舉發者舉發的事件是過去式或有點遙遠的過去時，很多人的第一反應是指責舉發者為什麼不早說，而忽略重點是事件真實與否。現實中跟Markopolos一樣能堅持過一載的人不多（他後來以該事件寫了本書名「沒人願意聽—真實的金融恐怖片」），我們這些普羅大眾通常是自己受傷、自己勸退自己，然後成為別人分享個案後說出「我不意外」的那個人。（#MeToo不就是活生生的實例）

     打這篇文章的同時（2018年九月二十七日），福特博士在議員見證公聽會下指責最近的最高法院大法官被提名人，是八零年間試圖性侵她的暴徒之一。自她出聲後，更多受害者浮出檯面指責同對象對她們造成類似的傷害。我們該專注於事件的真實度，而不是質問這些人為什麼選擇現在發聲。(為什麼現在發生其實是很蠢的問題，現在還不發聲，這個人可能會變成下個終身職的超級大法官耶！)調查是一定要的，這關於大法官被提名人的名聲，也危及這個國家的未來—「沒有人想把最高法院大法官這種終生職交給性侵犯」！我個人可能太小氣了，但期待超級大法官被提名人連「是否為性侵犯」的懷疑都沒有為條件，真的有這麼困難嗎？同時，我也想警告任何意圖誣告毀謗的人三思。真相經過考驗還是真相，但謊言早晚會穿幫。

     自此，我鼓勵所有的人在發現不義或惡行時，至少告訴一個信得過的朋友（誰信得過與否就靠自己判斷啦）。若真的沒朋友或不想拖累朋友，至少，盡可能保存證據，因為某天自己或別人可能用得到。我們不能讓任何霸凌輕鬆過關，因為這些人在修練等級後，會變成超級霸凌大魔頭，到時候還是得面對又提高善後難度。

     最近在自保駕訓課程中聽了個笑話，在理當有道路權的某Ａ被沒遵守道路權的某Ｂ撞死後，墓誌銘寫著「我明明有道路權」。（這笑話是為了強調法律規範的「道路權」也需要其他駕駛實際上「給予」道路權的狀態下，才有安全駕駛的結果）無論該故事重點，我開始思考自己對自己人生的期許。在此想問讀者，你希望世界如何看你？

     「我不意外」 ？

從「歪去」注音符號兒歌註解到注音符號改革

*update Mar 17 2018 (文底)

　　為女兒寫的「歪去」(wacky)注音符號歌獲得意外熱絡的迴響，也許我該改行寫兒歌了！在創作過程中收集資料的同時，配合自己學過些許外語經驗，在這裡整理出曲中沒有解釋的心得。多數注音符號碰到的疑問，其實是連我這個語言學幼幼班的草人都可以解答的，只不過母語學習過程中，老師們很少（可能也不太會）從語言學的角度切入解釋。我認為，對於目前的基礎教育，音標概念，不是廢除注音符號就能解決的，而是執教者必須自身有音標（基礎語言學）的概念，否則許多疑問還是會存在。奢望這短短幾分鐘的閱讀，或多或少能減輕讀者對注音符號的不解：（底下附有「歪去」兒歌連結）

一、先有字才有音標
　　首要建立觀念：音標是為了整合發音共識才研發的（共識=執政者）。今天說的中文、北京話、普通化、曼德琳⋯，或「國」語（使用「國」就讓我內心糾結），是明清時期於南京通行盛行又加以整理推廣的發音方式。古人注音的方法是一開始用字注字（可以是一字，如：㐤，音丹；或晚期切兩個字注音，如：訂，丁定切，意指取「丁」的子音ㄉ加上「定」的母音一ㄥ\。以字注字的缺點是，如果使用者對注音字根一開始認知就有差距時，最後讀起來一定也有差距。想想康熙字典字數收破四萬字，即使是只學拼音要使用（此拼音指拼出聲音，非現今的輸入法）的字根，也很難知道哪些字大家已有共識，能拿來作解讀範例。

　　因此，執政者設立一套為拼出聲音而設的統一系統是必要的。於是可想而知，一大堆自己覺得了解發音的學者與執政者開始整理自己最常使用的聲音，開始系統歸類。推行要順利，這些拼音使用的符號不能太多，要不然根本背不完，在考慮到一般人腦容量與拼音邏輯延伸的可能之下，注音符號增刪成今天這步田地。每個人對於聲音的理解方式不同，又由於我們的語言很少有子音結尾（[n]與[ŋ]是子音！），因此每個符號不論是子音或母音都在單獨使用時有母音結尾。換句話說，我們一開始學如何讀ㄅㄆㄇㄈ的時候（[bə]、[pə]、[mə]、[ə]讀ㄜ），不是學ㄅㄆㄇㄈ的用法（用法會只有[b]、[p]、[m]、[f]）。當符號的名稱與符號實際作用沒釐清，混淆容易產生。（如：[ə]讀ㄜ，但ə這個記號的名稱是schwa）

　　文章還沒看到睡著的話，也許讀者已經發現有個母音完全被忽略！？請大聲朗讀ㄓㄔㄕㄖㄗㄘㄙ，這些號稱子音的注音符號在日常生活單獨使用時其實包含了個沒有被註解過的母音（當讀者試圖在念這些注音符號時不發出舌尖聲，會發現舌中間與舌後根發出一個好像一又好像ㄜ但無法區別的聲音）。明知道少個聲音，為什麼不特別立這個母音？因為巧合的是，只有這七個注音符號單獨使用時會使用這個聲音。既然這聲音不單獨存在，為了減少大家多背一個母音的負擔，掌權者就很理直氣壯為人民省略一個母音符號。中華人民共和國的拼音系統用i替代這個母音，但也有用拼音學第二外語的人向我表示這會與另外一個正常的i聲音搞混。另外，拼音使用zh, ch, sh, r, z, c, s來表示ㄓㄔㄕㄖㄗㄘㄙ，用q, x表示ㄑ與ㄒ，用uu/v代表ㄩ...，對於慣用歐美語系國家的人來說還是在發音時很難猜出實際聲音為何。因此，我個人認為使用拼音並不會減少混淆。反之，全面換系統，表示預算增加（教科書、所有機關軟硬體改變、...）！若能略修改注音符號或是添加規則說明（連改都不用改）就補足，才是最省錢省力方便又合理的方法。

　　基本概念建立，我們開始看「歪去」注音歌中提到的「狀況」吧！（啥？拖這麼久才進入正題！）

二、注音符號的延伸使用
　　試想自己手中只有紅綠黃三色蠟筆，可是心裡想畫的顏色是粉紅色，在沒有白色淡化紅色的狀況下，只好用紅色勉強代替。 我的推測是注音符號也如此，有些聲音其實該被獨自列出來，但因為個案太少，或是容易聯想，因此被專家覺得最接近的聲音或組合代替（專家也是人，所以結論是見仁見智）：

1. ㄢ
　　ㄢ大部分情況念安[an](其實是ㄚ母音加個n止音)，一ㄢ組合念淹[jɛn]，ㄩㄢ組合念淵[ɥɛn]
　　ㄢ從[an]變成[ɛn]。組合後從ㄚ[a]變成ㄝ[ɛ]的情形在其他語言也有出現過。有些西班牙文使用者在說gracias的時候，最後的[a]聲音聽起來會像[ɛ]。（請他們慢慢講時通常又會變成[a]，也有不少人不承認。若讀者有機會聽西班牙人講快時，應該有機會聽到）。

　　探討原因，得先理解母音形成與舌頭相對位置！從舌頭一位置慢慢滑到ㄚ的過程中會經過ㄝ([i],..., [ɛ],..., [a])。中文每個字的出聲過程很快速，一ㄢ從[j]出發，當講到ㄝ[ɛ]還沒到ㄚ[a]時，止音[n]已經出現，於是就變成[jɛn]了。促成這演化的另一因素，與我們習慣的[n]發音方法有關。一般中文為母語人說[n]，不只用舌尖止音，常常會牽動舌頭中間一起上揚止音（當上揚部分過多，[n]會變成[ŋ]，因此有很多人ㄣㄥ容易混淆。）。因為不只牽動舌尖，母音由一到ㄚ的過程又得縮短更多（要不然會很累哪）！

好吧，跟在一之後解決了，那ㄩ之後也不正常是怎樣？
　　哈哈，ㄩ在語言學的看法是一[i/j]的舌形配合ㄨ[w/u]的唇形，因此比照一[j/i]看待，ㄩㄢ就不是[ɥan]而是[ɥɛn]了。

2.ㄣ
　　ㄣ單獨念[ən] ，跟在子音後面時會保留自己的ㄜ[ə]母音，跟在母音一ㄨㄩ後面會去掉自己的母音僅留下[n]，所以一ㄣ念[in]，ㄨㄣ念[un]，ㄩㄣ念[yn]。

3. ㄥ、ㄨㄥ，與ㄩㄥ
　　ㄥ單獨念[əŋ]，跟在子音後面時會保留自己的ㄜ[ə]母音，跟母音一後面會去掉自己的母音僅留下[ŋ]，因此一ㄥ念[iŋ]
　　ㄨㄥ其實是ㄨㄛ加上[ŋ]尾音，由於不想再創造個ㄛŋ符號，用ㄨㄥ表達[wɔŋ]意圖。
　　ㄩㄥ其實是一ㄛ加上[ŋ]尾音，由於不想再創造個ㄛŋ符號，用ㄩㄥ[ɥɔŋ]表達意圖。

4.ㄈㄥ
　　許多在台灣的人念風的時候不念ㄈㄥ[fəŋ]會念ㄈㄨㄥ[fɔŋ]，這很有可能是地方習慣，或是原本真的有ㄈㄥ跟ㄈㄨㄥ的差別，但後來被省成一個。許多來自中華人民共和國使用北京話的朋友們被我問到時都說他們沒有ㄈㄨㄥ的聲音。

5. ㄚ
　　許多在台灣的人在念「他她它牠祂」與害「怕」時會幫ㄚ加個鼻音(nasal)。有人說是因為後面接閉口子音開頭字造成鼻音，我個人是覺得比較可能是地方差異。因為我在單獨使用這些字結尾時，還是會忍不住偶爾加上鼻音。或是原本真的有另外一個鼻音ㄚ母音，但是在注音符號建立過程中因為是少數所以被省略了。許多來自中華人民共和國的北京話使用朋友跟我說他們的ㄚ從來沒有鼻音的疑慮。

三、解決之道
　　曲中提到的疑慮，在這裡做小註解，若有其他未提及的疑惑，也歡迎來訊討論。有人說要棄注音換拼音系統，在我用過拼音之後的感想是：對注音符號的使用者來說應該很容易上手，因為這兩個拼出聲音的系統是建立在相同的造聲邏輯，只是使用的符號不同。前面提到換了勞民傷財又不能解救混淆的根本原因（沒有語言學的基本語韻概念），因此我在這邊提出解決混淆的幾個方法：

1. 最省錢的方式
　　教注音符號時順便附上這些註解，師資培育或進修太花時間，我很樂意拿台灣政府的贊助（資金不足我也接受精神贊助，賞我個注音符號救星匾額也不賴啊）做教學影片解釋加範例。最根本的辦法還是要從語言學角度下手分析，但若只是想了解上面提到的狀況，十分鐘以內的教學影片就綽綽有餘了！

2. 修改注音符號
　　有幸與楊青矗先生合作為方言推廣努力，從他那邊學到注音符號混西方字母的方法得到啟發。他的方法其實能提高發音準確度百倍，以下為我建議混用注音與字母解決混淆的可能性：

A. 「淹」的注音能從一ㄢ變成一ㄝn（n代表的是ㄢ最後的舌尖止音）
B. 「奔」的注音能從ㄅㄣ變成ㄅㄜn，「音」的注音能從一ㄣ變成一n
C. 「燈」的注音能從ㄉㄥ變成ㄉㄜng（或ㄉㄜŋ），「東」能從ㄉㄨㄥ變成ㄉㄛng（或ㄉㄛŋ），「英」的注音能從一ㄥ變成一ng（或一ŋ），「傭」能從ㄩㄥ變成一ㄛng（或一ㄛŋ）
D. 至於部分的ㄊㄚ若真的該有鼻音，我們把法文鼻音母音音標上的~加在ㄚ上面或旁邊，但考證這個部分，就真的該交給專業的來了，小人我只是出嘴巴而已。

*小女子有幸參與出聲於楊先生的作品可參考：敦理出版社的「台詩三百首」

　　寫到這，希望大家能心平氣和討論解決之道。我這麼認真打字其實是自私想保留我目前的中打習慣，打字法改變對我這記憶體有限又沒時光機的媽媽而言是很頭痛的。另外補充（或重述）注音符號對於第二外語學習者是好事，許多朋友跟我表示使用看起來與自己母語完全不同的系統學習，容易避免自己母語習慣而造成的口音。（嘿！崇洋媚外的人們有沒有看到！？）文字的聲音是人賦予的，目前注音符號的確常造成疑惑，也有改良空間。敝人目前居住美國，事實上是美國人真的學過音標的人不是多數。想想英文字在沒有音標與規則介紹前提下才是真正的大亂鬥，但事實上是學母語的過程中，很少教育者會從語言學分析角度下手，所以英文雖然有幾家音標能使用，連會使用一種的都是稀有動物。所以注音符號雖然不完美，但真的沒有這些人想像中的那麼糟糕啦！

如果讀者尚未看過敝人的搞笑注音符號歌曲，請參考以下連結：

youtube(附中英字幕)： 

 

fb(無字幕)： 
 https://www.facebook.com/AuntieStrange/videos/1697630230298222/

*只要註明出處又不斷章取義或惡意修改，本文歡迎自由轉載分享。若對於如何不斷章取義或如何不惡意修改有疑問者歡迎詢問原作者

(啊! 女兒長大的世界到底會如何!?)

*Update Mar 17 2018
結果忘記寫「曲析」，我可是很期待這段落的呢：

1. 雖然說寫給快要十五個月大的女兒，其實前面段落的靈感來自教我先生。成人在學第二外語時不像小孩一樣可以很直覺記憶（毫無懷疑的記憶），大人通常需要系統整理跟解釋。因此我先生問我這麼多聲音怎麼背的時後，我就開始思考這些聲音一組一組的相似點在哪，開始為他分類。

2. 0:27 瑪莉兄弟補命配音在吉他高聲部出現

3. 1:01 ㄦ很難相處 一ㄨㄩ超合群：
　　分組到ㄦ時不知道該怎麼分，開始想ㄦ的可能用法，發現自己想不出有任何其他符號加在ㄦ前面的字。一ㄨㄩ可以單獨用，組合時可以是上面、中間，與底下，正好跟前面的ㄦ對應，就變成ㄦ難相處，一ㄨㄩ超合群了！

4. 1:15 受到玉玲瓏系列節目影響

5. 1:20 原本是想用雷鬼節奏，但後來使用國樂之後就作罷啦

6. 2:00 想來段rap配合傳統戲曲裡面「武場」（純粹自己為，大概就跟普契尼自以為的蝴蝶和杜蘭朵一樣心情吧）

7. 2:15 一直很想用「石室詩施氏」寫作，於是改編超短版

8. 結尾姿勢 突然想到胳肢窩... 哈哈!

9. 整曲旋律
　　寫作過程中旋律與文字聲調配合，是依照我幾年前發展的「五個音解讀注音符號四聲（其實是五聲）」為基礎，然後把每個字的音距增加或縮短，希望達到連沒有字幕都很容易懂得狀態。有興趣可參考：